5A - Site Review ~LUR2002-00071~ at 1541-1590 28th StreetCITY OF BOULDER
PLANNING BOARD AGENDA ITEM
MEETING DATE: May 22, 2003
(Agenda Item Preparation Date: May 4, 2003)
AGENDA TITLE:
Public hearing and consideration of Site Review #LUR2002-00071 to construct a 40 foot
tall, three story retail and residential building located at 1540-1590 28`h Street. Two existing
buildings would be removed. The proposed 6uilding will include 10,000 square feet of retail
and 16 one- and two-bedroom residential units on the second and third floors.
Applicant/Owner: 28`h Street Retail LLC
REQUESTING DEPARTMENT:
Peter Pollock, Planning Director
Robert O Cole, Land Use Review Manager
Don Durso, Planner
OVERVIEW:
The Planning $oard is being asked to consider a Site Review proposal to allow
redevelopment of the site immediately to the south of the Boulder Municipal Employee
Credit Union, located at 1540-1590 28~h Street. It is the last property on the southern edge of
the Boulder Valley Regional Center, which is under the jurisdiction of the Boulder Urban
Renewal Authority (BURA).
The site is .81 acres in size (35,284 square feet). The proposal is to construct an
approximately 3Q000 square foot, three-story building consisting of one floor of commercial
uses, with 16 residential units on the upper two floors.
The maximum height of the building is proposed to be 40 feet measured per the land use
code definition of height. The site qualifies for "conditional height" for a height up to 40
feet, because it is not immediately adjacent to an area that is either residentially zoned or
designated as such in the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP), and so it could be
s:\plan\pb-items~cnemos\ddculver AGENDA ITEM # SA Paee 1
approved by staff, provided it met the site review criteria. Staffissued an approval in March,
2003. However, neighboring property owners have appealed the staff decision to Planning
Buard, citing concerns with height, compatibility, shadows and views, and the rearrangement
of traffic patterns created by closing curb cuts along 28`h Street.
The project was reviewed by the BURA Boazd on Apri123, 2003, and was supported in a 6-
0 vote. Staff recommends approval with conditions based on a finding that the applicable
site review criteria are met.
STATISTICS:
Proposal: Site Review for a 32,285 square feet (not including underground parking)
mixed use building, comprised of 10,000 square feet of ground floor
commercial area, and 16 residential units, located at 1540-90 28th Street
Project Name: Culver Court Site Review
Location: 1540-1590 28t1i Street
Size of Site: 35,284 square feet
Zoning: RB-E (Regional Business-Established)
Comprehensive Plan: Transitional Business
Code Variations:
1. Parking in the 20 foot setback adjacent ta Culver Court (5 spaces).
2. Landscape screening of the parking area along Culvert Court reduced from a width of 6
feet to 1.5 Feet.
Boulder Valley Regional Center design guideline waivers:
1. 8 foot tree lawn along 28th where 10 feet is the BVRC guideline
2. 6 foot tree lawn along Culver where 8 feet is the BVRC guideline
3. 5 foot detached sidewalk along Culver where 6 feet is the BVRC guideline
KEY ISSUES:
1. Is the proposed building massing and height compatible with the existing character
of the surrounding area? Does the proposed building minimize blocking of views
and shadows of neighboring properties?
s:\plan\pb-items~nemos\ddculver AGENDA ITEM # SA Paee 2
2. Is the proposed site layout compatible with the neighborhood in terms of traf~c
flow, and changes to the use and street character of Gulver Court?
3. Is the proposed plan consistent with the Boulder Valley Regional Center (BVRC)
Design Guidelines?
BACKGROUND:
Existing Site / SiYe Context:
This site is zoned RB-E, Regional Business, and is located on the edge of the BURA area,
adjacent to 28th Street on the west. Arapahoe and 28`h Street are two of the highest volume
streets in the city (vicinity map, Attachment A). As such, this site forms the southerly gateway
into the BiJRA area. The site consists of two existing buildings, each one floor, with a total of
approximately 1Q000 square feet. The existing buildings are approximately 14-16 feet in height.
The site currently has one access from 28th Street, and full access along the Culver Court street
frontage--that is there is no existing curb and gutter along Culver Court. Almost the whole site is
covered by either buildings or hard surfaces, with little plant material. The site forms two-thirds
of the block, the only other building being the Boulder Municipal Employees Federal Credit
Union (Credit Union) to the north. The buildings adjacent to this site along 28~h and Arapahoe
consist of office and retail uses, and range from 25 to 32 feet in height.
Just to the southeast is a small 12 foot tall building which houses the only mosque between north
Denver and Longmont. This site is also zoned RB. Beyond the mosque, and outside the BURA
area, the properties to the southeast are zoned medium and low density residential.
Along the east side of the site, Culver Court, a relatively quiet street in comparison to 28th, forms
the boundary between this site and relatively low density development to the southeast, much of
which is residential. The properties straight to the east are zoned TB (Transitional Business), and
consist of two multi-family residentia] buildings, and an office building which is residential in
looks, owned by Mr. Bart Costello, one of the neighbors appealing this project. These three
buildings range in height from 30-35 feet. The land use designation for these three properties was
recently changed from Arterial Business to Transitional Business as part of the 2000 Boulder
Valley Comprehensive Plan update. At the time the 2000 BVCP update was begun, these three
lots were proposed to be changed to a High Dansity Residential designation, to encourage
development of higher density residential uses in the area. However, the revised maps prepared
for the BVCP public hearing process instead showed the proposed designation as Transitional
Business. That is th~ designaCion that was Snally approved.
Higher residential density can still be encouraged here through future changes to the TB-E
zoning category, contemplated as future implementation of the Jobs-Housing Project.
Alternatively, the BVCP land use designation may be considered again in the future for High
Density Residential designation. At this point, staff has not determined how to proceed in the
future. That leaves the current Transitional Business land use designation in place for the three
nearby properties.
s:\plan\pb-items~nemos\ddculver AGENDA ITEM # SA Paee 3
A neighbor, Mr. Costello, contends that it is premature to approve this project until the
designation on his property is reconsidered, because a building height of 40 feet could not be
approved if his land was designated residential. This is not correct. Planning Board may approve
building height up to 55 feet through site review, regardless of the adjacent land use designation.
It is true that staff could not approve height over 35 feet if the adjacent land use designation is for
residential, but can approve up to 40 feet of height if the adjacent land use designation is not
residential. On that basis, staf£previously approved the site review for this property. The
possibility of the land use designation changing to residential in the future prompted Mr. Costello
to argue that staff should not approve the plan, but should wait instead until the land use
designation is reconsidered, or alternatively, staff should refer the plan to the board. Staff instead
approved the plan based on the currcnt land use designation, and Mr. Costello requested call-up
to Pianning Board. The key issue now in front of Planning Board is whether the height proposed
meets the site review criteria, and does not hinge upon the timing of the land use designation of
Mr. Costello's site.
Project Description:
The project is presented in the applicanYs proposed plans (Attachment F). A modei will be
presented at the Planning Board hearing. The applicant has proposed redevelopment of the site
with a three-story building consisting of one floor of commercial space (1 Q000 square feet) and
two floors of residential units above (16 one and two bedroom units). Six of the units will be
one-bedroom, the rest will be two-bedroom. Two of the units must be permanently affordable.
A total of 46 parking spaces wil] be provided: 31 in an underground garage, 15 in a surface lot.
This meets the parking requirements for this zone.
Presently the west side of Culver Court is a sub-standard street, lacking curb, sidewalks and
street trees. The existing buildings on the site do not meet the required setbacks, and are located
as close as 2.3 feet from the property line. As part of this project, this side of the street will be
improved by installing curb, detached sidewalk, a landscape strip with street trees, and 12 new
on-street parallel parking spaces.
On the west side of the project, a 12 foot multi-use path and a row of street trees will be provided
as part of the 28th Street corridor improvements by the city. Adjacent to the south side of this
site, the transit service lane for the frontage road will merge into 28`h Street, per the 28`h Street -
South Section Transportation Plan.
Access to the property will be reduced from several points to a single curb cut on Culver Court.
This will enhance vehicular and pedestrian safety and efficiency along 28`~' Street. It will,
however, relocate all traffic that historically has accessed the site from 28th Street to a single
access, which is a shared access with the Credit Union.
The project evolved during the site review in response to initial concerns about a requested
parking reduction, and the intrusion of parking spaces into a required landscaped setback. The
applicanYs revision reflected a removal of the request for a parking reduction by providing a few
more spaces.
s:\plan\pb-itemsUnemos\ddculver AGENDA ITEM # 5A Paee 4
A variation requested is to the required 20 foot landscaped setback along Culver Court, and the
required 6 foot landscaped area to screen parking. The ~pplicant indicated that it faced the
dilemma of trying to fit the width of the building (narrowed to their perceived minimum
dimension to fit underground parking below), required sidewalks, landscaping and screening
along the three sides of the lot which front on streets. Because of all these competing issues, in
lieu of the landscaped buffer, the applicant has proposed a screening wall along the east edge of
the property to screen the five car spaces from the new sidewalk.
In June of 2002, a pre-application was held to initially review redevelopment of this site. The
applicant was informed that because it is not immediately adjacent to residentially zoned or
designated land, the site qualifies far "conditional height" of 40 feet in 9-3.2-4, BRC 1981.
However, because the site is within the BL1RA area, the applicant was also informed that it
would have to undergo a site review, but that a height up to 40 feet could be considered at the
staff level, because of the conditional height qualification. Obviously, the plan would still need
to meet the site review criteria in 9-4-11, BRC 1981, related to height.
On October 21, 2002, the applicant applied for site review, and lettars to surrounding property
owners within 600 feet of the site were sent out on October 25, 2002. Staff received public input
from four neighboring property owners during the review process. One of the earliest was from
Bart Costello, who owns the property located immediately to the east, at 2825 Marine (public
correspondence, attachment C). His building is an histaric two and a half story structure that was
moved from the Safeway site in the 1950s. His concerns were the height and massing of the
proposed building, the impacts of shadows, and the changes to traffic patterns that would happen
as a result of the proposal. Similar concerns were also expressed by representatives of the
mosque (attachment C), who also appealed the approval.
The city's development review committee (DRC) reviewed the proposal and issued two sets of
DRC comments, in November 2002; and again in January 2003 in response to revisions by the
applicant.
During the staff review process, the applicant, staff and neighbors met on site a number of times
to discuss the neighborhood concerns. The applicant created additional shadow analysas to
replicate summertime shadows at 6 and 7 pm. (Attachment D), in addition to the required
wintertime shadow studies. Staff found that the plan met the site review criteria, and issued a
disposition of approval on March 28, 2003, which was appealed by two neighbors, Bart Costello,
and the representative of the mosque.
As a precursor to the Planning Board hearing, the BURA Board considered this application on
Apri123, 2003, and specifically was asked to consider the following issues:
- Massing and height of the building, given its location to the adjacent neighborhood.
- Traffic flow, and changes to the use and street character of Culver Court.
The applicant, staff and neighbor made presentations to the Board. The neighbor submitted a
written statement along with photos as part of his presentation (Attachment C).
s:\plan\pb-items~rrtemos\ddculver AGENDA ITEM # SA Peae 5
The Bi.JRA Board voted 6-0 to recommend approval of this project to Planning Board. One
BURA member suggested realigning the intersection of Marine and Culver (which is a"Y"
intersection with a"yield" sign) to make the intersection safer. Staff's response is that the city
could consider this as part of the proposal if the applicant were interested in paying the cost of
the design and construction, as the transportation department does not have funds to cover such a
project. It is unknown at this time whether there is enough room to accomplish this suggestion,
but staff could review it as part of the Technical Document Review of final engineering.
ANALYSIS:
Positive aspects of the proposal are the mixed use, resident/employee pazking hidden from view
by locating it underground, and a decrease in impervious surface by removing the large parking
lot and creating quality open space and pedestrian amenities. The basic concepts For the plan are
consistent with the Site Review criteria. A detailed analysis of the site review criteria is included
as Attachment A. Neighbors have raised issues regarding height, massing shadows, and traffic
patterns, which also were the key issues considered by staff.
Is the proposed building massing and height compatible with the existing character
of the surrounding area? Does the proposed building minimize blocking of views
and shadows of neighboring properties?
Scale, Massine and Heieht
The site is on the south edge of BiJRA, and within the regional business zone. Neighboring
properties are zoned either Transitional or Regional Business, and designated as such in the
Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Map. However, a very short distance away to the southeast,
residential uses and zoning occur.
The proposed 40 foot building height (38 feet from grade to the top of the parapet) is taller than
the immediately surrounding buildings which vary from 12 feet to 32 feet. The buildings nearby
include the credit union at 22 feet, with a taller portion at 28 feet; the Carpet Exchange building
at 24.5 feet; the Barrelhouse Bar at 21 feet; Bart Costello's building at 2525 Marine at 30 feet; the
apartment to the east of that at 34 feet; the mosque at 10 feet; and the commercial building just to
the south of the proposed site at 24 feet. The model provided by the applicant shows that the
proposed height and scale is not out of character with the nearby buildings.
Mixed use is a new and desired type of land use in this area. Therefore, it will begin to establish
a new chazacter that is desired in this redevelopment area. It is expected that densities, heights
and massing will increase in the urban renewal district over time. Many of the neighboring
buildings, especially along 28`h and Arapahoe within the BURA area, are likely to redevelop and
would probably be taller than they are cunenUy. Additionally, the south portion of the
Crossroads Mall immediately to the north across Arapahoe has a voter approved height of 72'.
s:\plan\pb-items~nemos\ddculver AGENDA ITEM # SA Paee 6
Shadows and views
The project musYmeet the site review criteria which requires that °the orientation of buildings
minimizes shadows on and blocking of views from adjacent properties" (sec. 9-4-11(i)(2)(E)(iii),
B.R.C. 1981). However, this criterion does not require that a proposal avoid blocking all views
from all adjacent properties or prevent all shadows from falling on adjacent sites.
The applicant, as part of the site review submittal, was required to submit a shadow study which
depicts shadows cast on December 21, at 9, 12, and 3 o'clock. (Attachment F). This shadow
study shows that winter shadows are cast to the north, and mostly fall on street rights of way, or
the Credit Union. The neighboring property owners of the buildings to the east and southeast
(2825 Marine and the mosque at 1530 Culver Court), expressed concem about shadows during
the summer, when shadows are cast further to the south. As part of the ongoing discussion with
the neighbors, applicant and staff, the applicant created two additional shadow studies for June
21s~, at 6 and 7 p.m. (Attachment D). These studies show that no shadow will be cast on either
building at 6pm. At 7 p.m. the shadow will have reached the mosque, but not Mr. Costeilo's
building at 2825 Marine, as it is approximately 150 feet to the east. At some point in the
evening, because of Boulder's close proximity to the mountains, the mountains to the west will
begin shadowing these properties, possibly at the same time as the proposed building.
To judge the issue related to views, the applicant has built a model, which will be presented at
the hearing. Also, staff has created some digital simulations pictured from the east (the parking
lot located north of Mr. Costello's building), which show the existing building, the proposed
building, and a building similar to the one proposed, but at a 35 foot height (Attachment E).
From this study, staff has made the following conclusions:
~ The existing buildings are very low, and any redevelopment of the site would probabiy be
at least two stories, blocking at least some views to the west.
~ The proposed building is placed as far north and west as possible, minimizing as much as
possible the blocking of views of buildings to the east. Views to the flatirons will be
preserved by moving the building north on the site. However, views to the north will no
longer be visible from buildings to the east.
~ A building 40 feet tall will not block viaws to the mountains any more than one that is 35
feet tall.
2. Is the proposed site layout compatible with the neighborhood in terms of traffic
t1ow, and changes to the use and street character of Culver Court?
Transportation staff does not believe that consolidating the existing curb cuts into a single curb
cut on Culver Court or the increase in tuming movements on Arapahoe pose a safety concern. A
traffic analysis was not required since the anticipated increase in traffic did not approach 20
peak-hour trips for residential or 100 trips peak-hour trips for commercial uses. Additionally,
because 28th Street in this location is a CDOT right of way, CDOT would, upon redevelopment
of the property, require the curb cut along 28th Street to be closed, irrespective of the city's
wishes to locate traffic to the lesser category street, in terms of traffic volume.
s:\plan\pb-itexns~nemos\ddwlver AGENDA ITEM # SA Pase 7
TDM Measures
All required parking is being provided on-site. However, a reduction of trips and parking
impacts relative to the proposed use is still required. The applicanYs TDM plan provides for
Ecopasses and the establishment of an Employee Transportation Coordinator. Also, significant
numbers of bicycle racks are provided, some protected from weather by being located in an
underground area for residents and employees, and some at the surface for retail users.
In addition to the TDM proposed by the applicant, an opportunity may exist in the future, with
the re-development of the nearby Crossroads Mall, to create a Transportation Management
Organization (TMO). This site would be able to participate in this neighborhood-wide TMO
because of its location. A TMO provides many TDM opportunities at a lower cost due to the
volume of employees within a larger organization.
Is the proposed plan consistent with the Boulder Valley Regional Center (BVRC)
Design Guidelines?
Overall, the project advances the Design Guidelines General Goals of creating more mixed-use
development in the BVRC and upgrading "under-developed° properties. Retail uses on the
ground floor will be preserved, while creating 16 residential units above. The building design,
open space placement, and landscape design have a pedestrian orientation and will create a more
lively and attractive street-frontage along 28~h Street and Culver Court than exists there now. The
provision of underground parking contributes to the pedestrian quality by minimizing surface
parking. The building is designed to be attractive on all sides, and the service side of the
building occurs on the short north facade, which is adjacent to the service side of the Credit
Union building.
The BURA department and board evaluates project proposals against the BVRC Design
Guidelines, the BVRC Transportation Connections Plan, and any adopted area plan. There is no
area plan for this site. BURA staff found that the project meets the Design Guidelines and the
Connections Plan. Some of guidelines were varied or waived to accommodate the particulars of
the site or project necessities:
1) Guideline S.I.A.: The mass of the building should be broken down so as not to appear
a large monolithic structure. Applicants should consider stepping-back the upper stories
of the building.
2) Guideline S.1.C.: Consider varying building height and massing to make a visual
transition to adjacent buildings.
The applicant will present a three-dimensional model of the building and the
neighborhood at the hearing. The applicant has asserted that stepping back the upper
story would effectively eliminate the units on the third floor, and without those units, the
project would be unfeasible. The mass of the building is broken up by the balconies on
the upper floors, the recessed retail entry bays and awnings on the ground floor, and the
use of a variety of exterior materials.
s:\plan\pb-items~nemos\ddculver AGENDA ITEM # SA Paee S
The proposed building will be taller than nearby existing buildings. However, the Design
Guidelines deliberately do not address the height issue numerically, as this is the role of
the Land Use Code. Instead, they attempt to address how building height should be
treated from a design standpoint, recognizing that increased densities in the urban renewa]
district are likely to increase over time.
3) Guideline 3.I.G.: Locate buildings and open space to preserve and take advantage of
views to the west and to capitalize on sun ezposure. When the effect on significant views
from nearby streets or properties is in guestion, consider creating a photo simulation
demonstrating that effect.
Guideline S.I.D.: Arrange building massing to protect views to the west from public
spaces, such as sidewalks and streets on and near the site.
As stated above, the applicant indicated that the full volume of building was needed to
make a mixed-use building feasible on this site. However, the building is placed on the
site as far north and west as possible so that views to the west can be enjoyed from a
plaza on the sunny south side of the property. This also minimizes as much as possible
the shadowing and blocking of views of buildings to the east. Obviously, preserving
views from every sidewalk or public space is impossible in almost any redevelopment
project, whether the building is one, two or three stories. The applicant declined to do a
photo simulation or perspective showing the extent to which the proposed building will
block views from the sidewalk and properties on the east side of Culver Court. Again,
this part of the guideline is a"suggestion to consider." However, the model being
prepared for the public hearings may be illustrative in this respect.
4) Guideline 4.I.B, G. & L.: Minimum width for a landscape strip on Culver Court (`A"
street) is 8 feet, and on 28`~' Street ("C"street) is 10 feet. Minimum width for a sidewalk
on Culver Court (`A "street) is 6 feet.
Staff approved a 2 foot reduction in the width of the landscape strip (the planting strip
between the sidewalk and curb) along both streets, and a 1 foot reduction in the width of
the sidewalk along Culver Court. The sidewalk and landscape requirements could be met
by reducing the width of the building. However, the building width could not be reduced
because the underground parking structure is already at its minimum allowed width. The
variances are also supported because the site is relatively narrow when considering it is
surrounded on three sides by streets.
PUBLIC COMMENT AND PROCESS:
Required public notice was given in the form of written notification mailed to all property
owners within 600 feet of the subject property and a sign posted on the property for at least 10
days. All notice requirements of Section 9-4-2, B.R.C. 1981 have been met.
s:\plan\pb-items\memos\ddculver AGENDA ITEM # SA Pase 9
Staff has had contact with four neighboring property owners via e-mail, phone calls and letters.
Two of those contacts have appealed the staff approval. Ongoing communication has taken place
between staff, the applicant and these two neighbors since November, up to the time of appeai as
outlined under "Background/Project Description" above. Two others expressed concern about
the height and parking impacts, but staff has not had more than an initial inquiry from each of
them. All written comments received from neighbors are included as Attachment C.
STAFF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION:
Planning staff finds that the application for Site Review # LUR2002-00071 meets the criteria for
Site Review, subject to the following conditions:
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
The Applicant shall be responsible for ensuring that the development shall be in
compliance with all approved plans dateri October 21, 2002, and revised January 6, 2003,
and on file in the city of Boulder Planni.~g and Development Services Department.
2. Prior to application for a buiiding permit, the Applicant shall submit and get approval for
a Technical Document Review for the following items, subject to the approval of the city
of Boulder Planning and Development Services Division:
a. Fina] architectural plan, including materials and colors, to ensure compliance with
the intent of this approval and compatibility with the area. The architectural intent shown
on the approved plans are acceptable. Planning staff will review plans to assure that the
architectural intent is met.
b. A detailed landscape plan, including size, quantity, and type of plants existing and
proposed; type and quality of non-living landscaping materials; any site grading
proposed; and any irrigation system proposed, to insure compliance with this approval
and the City's landscaping requirements. Removal of trees must receive prior approval of
the Planning Department. Removal of any tree in City right-of-way must also receive
prior approval of the City Forester.
c. A detailed lighting plan showing location, size, and intensity of illumination units,
showing compliance with Section 9-3.3-17, B.R.C. 1981, and the BVRC Design
Guidelines on parking lot lighting and site lighting.
d. A final Grading and Stormwater Plan and Report.
e. A final Utility Plan.
f. Easement dedications consistent with those shown on the site plan.
g. A final revised site plan which removes the portion of curbs which intrude into
the back-out area of the two full sized parking spaces.
3. Prior to application for any residential building permit, covenants in a form acceptable to
the city manager to secure the permanent affordability of each perrnanently affordable
unit must be signed and recorded and any applicable cash-in-lieu amounts must be paid.
s:\plan\pb-itemsUnemos\ddculver AGENDA ITEM # SA Paee 10
4. Prior to application for a building permit, the joint access easement with the Boulder
Municipal Employee's Federal Credit Union located within the proposed building
envelope must be vacated.
Prior to application for a building permit, the Applicant shali apply for and receive
approval for a local flood map revision which will finalize the remapping of the extent of
the conveyance zone in the vicinity of the project.
6. Concurrently with building permit application, the Applicant will be required to apply for
a floodplain development permit.
The height of the proposed building shall not exceed 40 feet, as measured per the
definition of height contained in Title 9, Land Use Regulations, (B.R.C. 1981). A height
survey will be required to verify this requirement.
8. Prior to a building permit application, the Applicant shall submit a detailed
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) plan to the Public Works Department for
review and approval, that provides for a minimum of 10%, or whatever is practicable,
shift away from single occupant vehicle use, that shall include, but is not limited to the
foilowing: provide three consecutive years of transit passes to all employees and
designation of an Employee Transportation Coordinatar.
9. Prior to application for a building permit, the Applicant shall submit a financial security
to guarantee the initial operation of the RTD Ecopass program for the benefit of all
employees within the development. The guarantee shall be in an amount not to exceed
$3800 to cover program operations far no less than three consecutive years. The
Applicant shall pay any amount above the amount provided in the guarantee required to
ensure operation of the RTD Ecopass program far the benefit of all employees within the
development for three years.
10. Engineering plans and reports submitted in support of Land Use Review applications are
reviewed only for conceptual conformance with city standards. Final engineering plans
and reports submitted for Technical Document Review shall meet all requirements of the
Design and Construction Standards (DCS) and Boulder Revised Code, 1981. If elements
of the approved Land Use Review preclude the development of plans meeting these
requirements, the applicant shall be required to modify the Land Use Review approval
through the appropriate city review process.
Approved By:
'f'~ -~~ ~;~~~ ,~~~.
Peter Poll~ock P ning Director
s:\plan\pb-itemsUnemos\ddculver AGENDA ITEM # SA Paee 11
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A: Site Review Criteria Checklist
Attachment B: Vicinity Map
Attachment C: Conespondence Received
Attachment D: Additional Shadow Studies
Attachment E: Digital Simulations
Attachment F: Applicant's Proposed Plans
s:\plan\pb-itemsUnemos\ddculver AGENDA TTEM # SA Pase 12
ATTACHMENT A
Site Review Criteria Checklist
Criteria for Review: No site review application shall be approved unless the approving agency
finds that:
(1)Boulder Vallev Comprehensive Plan:
~}_es (A) The proposed site plan is consistent with the purposes and policies of the
Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan. The property is zoned RB-E, regional
business-established. Retail and residential uses are allowed in this zone.
(B) The proposed development shall not exceed the maximum density
associated with the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan residential land use
designation. Additionally, if the density of existing residential development
within a three-hundred-foot area surrounding the site is at or exceeds the
density permitted in the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan, then the
maximum density permitted on the site shall not exceed the lesser of:
na (i) The density permitted in the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan,
or,
RB-E zoning does not have a maximum density in the BVCP
yes (ii) The maximum number of units that couid be placed on the site without
waiving or varying any of the requirements of Chapter 9-3.2, "Bulk
and Density Standards" B.R.C. 1981. Based upon the open space
requirements for this zone, the proposed density of 1G units is
below the 22 units that could be developed on the site without
varying the requirements of 9-3.2.
(2)Site DesiQn: Projects should preserve and enhance the community's unique sense
of place through creative design that respects historic character, relationship to the
natural environment, and its physical setting. Projects should utilize site design
techniques, which enhance the quality of the project. In determining whether this
subsection is met, the approving agency will consider the following factors:
(A) Onen Space: Open space, including, without limitation, parks, recreation
areas, and playgrounds:
~}_es (i) Useable open space is arranged to be accessible and functional; 45%
open space is provided where 15% open space is required. This
open space consists of:
a. Private outdoor decks for each residential unit totaling
1,527 sf for 16 units or 95 sf/unit.
b. Pnblic open space totals 14,364 sf.
n/a (ii) Private open space is provided for each detached residentia] unit;
no detached units are proposed
~~es (iii) The project provides for the preservation of or mitigation of adverse
impacts to natural features, including, without limitation, healthy long-
lived trees, significant plant communities, ground and surface water, ,
wetlands, riparian areas, drainage areas, and species on the federal
s:\plan\pb-items~nemos\ddculver AGENDA ITEM # SA Paee 13
Endangered Species List, "Species of Special Concern in Boulder
County" as designated by Boulder County, or prairie dogs (Cynomys
ludiovicianus) which is a species of local concern, and their habitat;
The area oF redevelopment on the site does not contain signiFcant
long-lived trees or other important plant materiai. Almost the
whole site is impervious surface at this time.
yes (iv) The open space provides a relief to the density, both within the project
and from surrounding development; The ground level open space is
located ou all sides of the building. Hard surface open space is
located to the south. On the west, south and east, new landscaped
areas with trees and shrubs are proposed. The new building wi(I
be further away from the existing developments to the east and
south, and landscaped areas will provide buffers from those
developments.
na (v) The open space provides a buffer to protect sensitive environmental
features and natural areas; and no environmental features or natural
areas are present.
na (vi) If possible, open space is linked to an area- or citywide system. The open
space on the site is immediately adjacent to a city multi-use path, which runs
along the east side oFthe 28tb Street frontage road, and extends north to the
crossroads mall area. This path is part of the BVRC trail system, and
extensive trails are accessible from this trail.
(B) Onen Space in Mixed Use Developments: Developments that contain a mix of
residential and non-residential uses:
(i) The open space provides for a balance of private and shared areas for the residential
uses and common open space that is available for use by both the residential and non-
residential uses that will meet the needs of the anticipated residents, occupants, tenants,
and visitors of the property; and residential units have private decks, and a small
residential lobby. Shared open space with the nonresidential uses includes
landscaped areas, as well as a patio area on the south.
(ii) The open space provides active azeas and passive areas that will meet the needs of the
anticipated residents, occupants, tenants, and visitors of the property and are compatible
with the surrounding area or an adopted plan for the area. The open space is a urban
type of open space consisting of hardscaped areas for residents and non-residents.
(C) LandscapinQ:
,yes (i) The project provides for aesthetic enhancement and a variety of plant and hard surface
materials, and the selection of materials provides for a variety of colors and contrasts
and the preservation or use of local native vegetation where appropriate; The
existing landscaping along 28th Street will be preserved, and large portions of
the site which are now impervious will be landscaped as part of this project. No
native vegetation exists on the site. .
s:\plan\pb-itemsUnemos\ddculver AGENDA ITEM # SA Paee 14
NA (ii) Landscape design attempts to avoid, minimize, or mitigate impacts to important
native species, plant communities of special concern, threatened and endangered
species and habitat by integrating the existing natural environment into the project;
No native or endangered species are present.
~}_es (iii) The project provides significant amounts of plant material sized in excess of the
landscaping requirements of Sections 9-33-2, "General Landscaping and Screening
Requirements" and 9-33-3, "Streetscape Design Standards" B.R.C. 1981; and as
compared to by-right development, a significant amount of material is being
proposed on this site.
yes (iv) The setbacks, yards, and useable open space along public rights-of-way are
landscaped to provide attractive streetscapes, to enhance architectural features, and to
contribute to the development of an attractive site plan. The site incorporates city
landscaping plans along the path and two streets. The site is landscaped
consistent with "urban" landscaping.
(D) Circulation: Circulation, including, without limiYation, the transportation system that
serves the property, whether public or private and whether constructed by the developer
or not:
~}_es (i) High speeds are discouraged or a physical separation between streets and the project is
provided; No streets are proposed within this project. The small surface
parking area is separated by a short wall and landscaping from a new sidewalk
to the east. Where no sidewalks exist today, a new 5' wide detached sidewalk is
proposed along Culver Court.
~}_es (ii) Potential conflicts with vehicles are minimized; All curb cuts have been eliminated
along 28th Street. The continuous curb cut along Culver will be consolidated
with the Credit Union's curb cut to the north. Additional on-street parking will
be provided along the west side of Culver Court, which should reduce speeds
along Culver Court.
yes (iii) Safe and convenient connections accessible to the public within the project and
between the project and existing and proposed transportation systems are provided,
including, without limitation, streets, bikeways, pedestrianways and trails; a 12-foot
wide detached multi use path will be built along the west edge of the property,
when the 28th Street improvements are ~nished. This will link directly to
crossroads mall, and other BVRC paths. A new 5' detached sidewalk is
proposed along the east side of the property, with a tree lawn as well, where no
pedestrian amenities exist today.
yes (iv) Alternatives to the automobile are promoted by incorporating site design
techniques, land use patterns, and supporting infrastructure that supports and
encourages walking, biking, and other alternatives to the single-occupant vehicle;
The site location within the BVRC is convenient to pedestrians and bicyclists.
Sidewalks along both sides of the project promote walking and riding. A small
surface parking lot provides some retail parking, while minimizing the amount
of hardscaped area. Storefronts are located at grade with immediate access to
the 28th street multi-use path. A significant number of bicycle racks are
s:\plan\pb-items~nemos\ddculver AGENDA ITEM # SA Paee 15
provided, some of which are specifically for residents, and are protected from
weather by being located in an underground area. The new plaza and a 5'
setback from the multi use path further encourage pedestrians to stop and use
the sidewalk without interrupting the movement of people on the multi use path.
yes (v) Where practical and beneficial, a significant shift away from single-occupant vehicle
use to alternate modes is promoted through the use of travel demand management
techniques; see above. The applicant's TDM inctudes transit passes for all
employees, 30 covered lockable bike parking spaces in the garage for tenants
and employees, and 35 surface bicycle parking at grade. Additionally, an
employee transit coordinator will be established once the building is constructed.
yes (vi) On-site facilities for extemal linkage are provided with other modes of transportation,
where applicable; Access to 28th Street and Arapahoe transit opportunities are
available to this site. The new multi-use path and new sidewalks along Culver
Court will be directly iinked to the city-wide path system.
yes (vii) The amount of land devoted to the street system is minimized; no new streets are
being developed as a part of this project. The removal of a large parking lot is
part of the proposal, and is being replaced by sidewalks, street trees and
landscaping.
~}_es (viii) The project is designed for the types of traffic expected, including, without
limitation, automobiles, bicycles, and pedesh-ians, and provides safety, separation
from living areas, and control of noise and exhaust; and all residential parking is
provided underground. Fifteen surface spaces will be available for retail
customers.
yes (ix) City construction standards are met, and emergency vehicle use is facilitated. City
design and construction standards will be met with the project
~E) P~'
.~es (i) The project incorporates into the design of parking areas measures to provide safety,
convenience, and separation of pedestrian movements from vehicular movements;
Multiple curb cuts are being eliminated, reducing pedestrian contlicts. Parking
will take access from one shared curb cut at the north edge of the project.
Approximately 2/3 of the parking will be provided underground. The surface
lot is separated from the sidewalks by either buildings, landscaping, or a low
screenwall.
yes (ii) The design of parking areas makes efficient use of the land and uses the minimum
amount of land necessary to meet the parking needs of the proj ect; two thirds of the
parking will be placed under the proposed building.
~}~es (iii) Parking areas and lighting are designed to reduce the visual impact on the project,
adjacent properties, and adjacent streets; and lighting will be reviewed at the
technical document phase, to ensure that it will not impact other uses near this
project, and that it meets all lighting codes.
na (iv) Parking areas utilize landscaping materials to provide shade in excess of the
requirements in Section 9-3.3-12, "Parking Area Design Standards," B.R.C. 1981.
new street trees will be provided along both sides of the project to shade
sidewalks and the proposed new parking lot, where none exist today.
s:\plan\pb-items~nemos\ddculver AGENDA ITEM # SA Paee 16
(F) Building Design, Livabili~, and Relationshin to the ExistinQ or
Proposed SurroundinQ Area:
~}_es (i) The building height, mass, scale, orientation, and configuration are compatible with
the existing character of the area or the character established by an adopted plan for
the area;
The existing context includes suburban automobile-related retail and office with
a few two and three story apartment or apartment/ofGce buildings along Marine
Street which are of somewhat lower height (between 24 and 35 feet) than the
proposed project. Surrounding buildings do not have consistent pattern of
massing or orientations. The existing context has a high amount of curb cnts
and surface parking. Surrounding buildings include a bank, an automobile-
oriented shopping strip, a stand-alone restaurant/sports bar, an office building,
some apartment or apartment/office buildings, and a mosque. There is a
neighborhood of duplex and single family residential to the southeast. This
neighborhood is surrounded on three sides by the BVRC redevelopment area
and on the south by Boulder Creek and the Boulder Creek bike path. The
proposed building is three stories high with retail on the ground level, and two
f7oors of residential uses. Mixed use is a new and desired use type for this area.
Therefore it will not match existing conditions in this redevelopment area.
The proposed building is organized parallel to and visually fronting on 28th
street - the major street along this site.
Resolution 922, adopted by City Council on February 18, 2003, provides
direction for the Jobs/Housing Project. The direction provided for the Boulder
Valley Regional Center is to encourage mixed use that favors retail and
residential uses. The appropriate FARs are to be developed in consultation with
the Boulder Urban Renewal Authority. The proposed I'AR fbr this project is
0.91, of which approximately .33 FAR is For retail uses and the rest for
residential. This is consistent with the FAR ranges that had been recommended
by staff of a maximum of 0.4 - 0.5 FAR for non-residential uses and an overall
FARof0.8-1.0.
The proposed building will create an appropriate boundary and transitional
edge along 28th street that helps to frame the residential neighborhood to the
southeast. It does this by:
a. Blocking 28th street noise from penetrating t6e neighborhood.
b. By being parallel to the western edge of the neighborhood, it helps to
frame and define an edge to this neighborhood.
c. Providing mixed uses and outdoor public areas with mountain views will
make this new edge of the neighborhood into a pedestrian friendly zone.
The project meets the following BVRC Design Guidelines as pertain to mass,
scale, orientation, and configuration:
a. "Buiidings and public spaces should be more visible, and parking should
be less visible."
s:\plan\pb-i[ams~nemos\ddculver AGENDA ITEM # 5A Paee 17
b. "The BVRC should become a place where people want to stroll and
linger, not just do errands and drive away."
c. "the mixture of different uses in the BVRC may be tightly woven within
the same development or a single building..."
d. "Locate buildings close to the street and maximize street-frontage"
e. "Minimize curb cuts:'
f. "Try to provide structured, rather than surface parking."
g. "Design all sides of the building."
h. "Enclose trash storage."
y_es (ii) The height of buildings is in general proportion to the height of existing buildings and
the proposed or projected heights of approved buildings or approved plans for the
immediate area;
Existing Character (height of buildings):
Existing buildings nearby include the two-story credit union, built over grade
parking, a two and a half story office building on Culver Court, a one-story
structure used as a mosque on Culver Court and Marine Street, a two and a half
story apartment/office building on Marine Street (perhaps 32' high above
grade), and a three story apartment building on Marine Street (perhaps 34'
above grade). The proposed building is approximately 37' high above grade to
top of roof. The model shows that the proposed building is within the acceptable
height to be compatible.
Adopted Plans for the Area (height of buildings):
The BVRC Design Guidelines call For creating a mixed-use pedestrian oriented
neighborhood with underground parking.
The BVRC Design Guidelines do not directly address height of buildings.
However, the Crossroads Mall area has a voter approved height of 72 feet.
BVRC Guidelines S.1.A & C suggests that one consider stepping back upper
stories (above second story), and varying building height or massing to make a
visual transition to adjacent buildings. While the height has not been varied
vertically, the building massing has been broken down into vertical sections
where the whole building steps back and forward. The alternating bays of the
building recess back from the front of the building in order to reduce the scale of
the structure and to create shadow lines that give definition to the recessed
areas.
No adjacent site has been redeveloped recently. The nearest redevelopment is
the building now under construction at the southwest corner of 28th and
Canyon. The height of that building will be 42 feet. A mixed-use pedestrian-
oriented neighborhood such as is contemplated by the BVRC Design Guidelines
will require significant density to provide enough people to support pedestrian-
oriented uses, businesses, and pubtic transit. It is likely that the BVRC
eventua(ly will be built-out at heights of 40 feet up to the allowed height within
s:\plan\pb-items~nemos\ddculver AGENDA ITEM # SA Paee 18
the Crossroads Mall, in order to achieve this density and character.
~~es (iii) The orientation of buildings minimizes shadows on and blocking of views from
adjacent properties; The project is oriented lengthwise in the north-south
direction, parallel to 28th. This orientation minimizes shadows cast by this mass
of building, and minimizes cold, north-facing outdoor spaces.
BVRC Design Guideline 3.1.G suggests locating buildings and open space to
preserve and take advantage of views to the west, northwest, and southwest from
public spaces. Views to the mountains from this site will be enhanced by this
building, due to the provision of new usable open space on the west and south
side of the building outside the retail storefronts. Currently, there are few
public spaces within the neighborhood that enjoy uninterrupted mountain views.
Views to the mountains from areas immediately east of the building will be
blocked more than they are by the current one story structures. However, the
proposed building is placed as far to the west and north as is possible on the site,
thereby reducing as much as possible the shadows and blockiug of views from
the two properties to the east and south. There are some windows in two nearby
buildings from which views of the mountains will be altered. An
apartment/office building on Marine Street,150 ft to the east, has a number of
windows facing west towards this proposed building. The mosque to the
southeast also has windows facing west. The new building will affect views to the
north from these two structures. Views to the west and southwest will generally
be preserved. Summer shadow studies have been submitted as well. Further,
views will not be significantly impacted as compared to a building built at the
"by-right" height of 35' build at the allowed setbacks for the site.
yes (iv) If the character of the area is identifiable, the project is made compatible by the
appropriate use of color, materials, landscaping, signs, and lighting;
There is no consistent character in terms of color, materials, landscaping signs
or lighting. The site is within the BURA/BVRC area, which contemplates an
urban development scheme. Many of the nearby buildings are masonry of some
type, either stucco or brick. This project is proposing mostly a brick surface,
which is consistent with the surrounding structures, and is an appropriate
material for an urban setting.
~}_es (v) Buildings present an attractive streetscape, incoxporate architectural and site design
elements appropriate to a pedestrian scale, and provide for the safety and convenience
of pedestrians;
The design intent is to create a four sided pedestrian friendly urban building
with a mixture oF uses.
The building is broken down in scale into smaller vertical masses which will
have masonry as an exterior material and punched openings - to give the project
a"main-street" feeL Transparent storefronts will be located on all sides of the
building so that there is no unattractive back side. Trash dumpsters will be
hidden within the building.
The public entry to the residential units will be via a lobby and small plaza off of
Culver Court.
s:\plan\pb-items\memos\ddculver AGENDA ITEM # SA Paee 19
yes (vi) To the extent practical, the project provides public amenities and planned
public facilities; the surface open space will be open to the public and
accessible from the multi-use path.
~~es (vii) For residential projects, the project assists the community in producing a variety of
housing types, such as multi-family, townhouses,, and detached single-family units as well
as mixed ]ot sizes, number of bedrooms, and sizes of units; Two units will be
permanently affordable and a cash-in-lieu payment will be provided for the
additiona11.2 units required. The units vary iu size from 830 to 1,375 square feet.
y_es (viii) For residential projects, noise is minimized between units, between buildings, and
from either on-site or off-site external sources through spacing landscaping, and
building materials; Residential units that enter on the Grst floor each have their
own private entries, oriented to all four sides of the building. Each also have.
private open space in decks porches and balconies.
_yes (ix) A lighting plan is provided which augments security, energy conservation, safety,
and aesthetics; The lighting plan will be required to comply with proposed city
standards.
n/a (x) The project incorporates the natural environment into the design and avoids,
minimizes, or mitigates impacts to natural systems; No natural environment is
present within this area.
yes (xi) Cut and fill are minimized on the site, the design of buildings conforms to the natural
contours of the land; and the site design minimizes erosion, slope instability,
landslide, mudflow or subsidence, and minimizes the potential threat to property
caused by geological hazards. The site is almost completely flat. Very little
regarding, except to control drainage, is proposed.
(G) Solar Siting and Construction: Far the purpose of ensuring the maximum potential for
utilization of solar energy in the city, all appiicants for residential site reviews shall
place streets, lots, open spaces, and buildings so as to maximize the potential for the
use of solaz energy in accordance with the follawing solar siting criteria:
yes (i) Placement of Open Snace and Streets: Open space areas are located wherever practical
to protect buildings from shading by other buildings within the development or from
buildings on adjacent properties. Topography and other natural features and
constraints may justify deviations from this criterion. The building is located to the
north of the site to utilize the south area as a plaza. The building to the south will
not shade this structure.
y_es (ii) Lot Lavout and Buildin Siting: Lots are oriented and buildings are sited in a way,
which maximizes the solar potential of each principal building. Lots are designed to
facilitate siting a structure, which is unshaded by other neazby structures. Wherever
practical, buildings are sited close to the north lot line to increase yard space to the
south for better owner control of shading. There is only one lot in this
development. However, the lot is oriented north-south, and the building is placed
to the north, to utilize the south-facing area as a pedestrian plaza.
y_es (iii) Buildine Form: The shapes of buildings are designed to maximize utilization of solar
energy. Buildings shall meet the solar access protection and solar siting requirements
of Chanter 9-8, "Solar Access," B.R.C. 1981. The project creates a south facing
s:\plan\pb-items~nemos\ddculver AGENDA ITEM # SA Paee 20
public outdoor plaza. There are no north-facing residential units - all units
receive south suu at some time during the day. The residential lobbies on each
floor have south-facing glazing. The project utilizes solar sun shading on all
large windows and expanses of glass. Additionally, this zone does not require
solar shadow compliance.
_yes (iv) LandscavinQ: The shading effects of proposed landscaping on adjacent buildings
are minimized. Mostly only street trees are proposed for this project. Street trees
are required, and are intended to shade the street and on street parking. No
landscaping is proposed which would cause unwanted shadows on adjacent
properties.
s:\plan\pb-items\memos\ddculver AGENDA ITEM # SA Pase 21
ATTACHMENT B
City of Boulder Vicinity Map
O
O
N
~
SubjectArea Z
9540-1590 28th Si ,
~
T8-D
HR-E
Y
~
a
I~l~-~
0
Locatian: 1540-1590 28th St
Project Name: ~ulverCourt Mixed Use Dev'
Review Type: Site Review
Review Number; LUR2002-00071
Applicanti 28th Retail, LLC
~ ~r -^~~
- Boulder
N~RTH melrtarmatlondeplpeaanmismapisprovltlea
as: graphlcal repBSen[atlon mry. ne Clry of Boultlee
1 inch
Agenda Item # _~_ Page # .a' _
DOfI DUfSO - 1540 2Sth 5L ~aye i
- ATTACHMENT C
Prom: <Mqlaw@aol.com>
To: <plandevelop@ci.boulder.co.us>
Date: 10/29/2002 10:25:48 AM
Subject: 1540 28th St.
I am at 1450 28th St. and 2804 Olson. Dr
My biggest concern is whether the parking will be adequate for the tennants
and their employees. Presently the revamping of the 28th St. Frontage Road
and the elimination of the parking that the employees of neighboring building
will flood the neighborhood streets as well as the decrease accessibility at
28th & Colorado will increase the traffic flow in the Cordry neighborhood.
Thank You for your attention
Sincerely,
Michael Law
303-443-0123
Agenda Item # ,~ ~ Page # •~
Bart Costello
1650 38`n Street, Suite 201
Boulder, CO 80301-2601
(303)442-7200
Location:
Project name:
Review Type:
Review No.
Applicant:
Deaz Mr. Durso,
November 3, 2002
1540 28`h St
Culver Court Mixed Use Development
Site Review
LUR2002-000741
28`h Retail LLC
I have received your notice of site review for the above proposed building and I
would like to make the below listed comments. I own a building directly east of the
proposed site, abutting Culver Street, located at 2825 Marine Street.
In sununary, my primary concerns are two-fold. First, that the proposed forty-
foot tall structure is too tall in an azea of ten to twenty-five foot structures. Lastly, a very
dangerous traffic problem would be created on Arapahoe near Culver, and on Culver
itself.
Although 28`h Street is busy, the existing commercial structures on the proposed
site are all one story tall. The two streets on the east side of the proposed sites, Culver
and Marine, aze in sleepy, residential neighborhoods.
My comments are:
(1) A forty-foot tall building is very out of chazacter for the neighborhood. There are no
structures in the vicinity which are over 25 feet tall, and most aze one story tall.
(2) Culvex Street already creates a dangerous driving hazazds on Arapahoe.
Most traffic gets on Culver from east-bound Arapahoe. The tum on to Culver
Street from Arapahoe is less than a normal city block east of 28`~ Street, so cars
tuming east onto Arapahoe from southbound 28`" Street are suddenly confronted
with cazs stopping on Arapahoe to turn right (south) onto Culver~
But most traffic turning onto Culver approaches from southbound 28`h Street.
This access to Culver is even more dangerous as Arapahoe has two southbound,
left-tum lanes. I have seen many cazs, who aze on the inside (median) left-turn
lane of Arapahoe, tum left on Arapahoe, and find themselves in the middle lane of
Agenda Item # ~ ~ Page # a~ ~
east-bound Arapahoe. Then they have to stop in traffic to cross to the outside lane
on Arapahoe to make the sudden tum onto Culver. IY•s a mess on Arapahoe.
During this process, cazs aze tuming right from northbound 28`h street into that
very same lane on Arapahoe.
Simply put: adding to the traffic on Culver would create a very dangerous traffic
situation on Arapahoe itself, from Culver west to 28`h. And westwazd into the
intersection of 28`h and Arapahoe. The problem is that Culver at Arapahoe is
not an intersection. Culver is a surprise "mid-block° street off of busy
Arapahoe.
The proposed building would have neazly all of its traffic enter Culver from
Arapahoe, as this is the only way to access the building coming from town.
(3) The character of the neighborhood, at least east of Culver, is residential. There is an
Islamic Religious Center immediately east and adjacent to the proposed structure. That
one story Center would be overwhelmed with traffic and darkness from the sheer mass of
a forty-foot structure in the neighborhood. So too would our historic building at 2825
Marine Street.
(4) There is already an on-street, and off-street, parking shortage in the neighborhood.
The site review notice says that the proposed building desires a reduction in normally
required parking spaces. There is no parking on Culver or Marine Streets which would
allow any additional parking, and Culver and Marine Streets aze the only on-street
parking in the area.
(5) The character of the neighborhood is residential, with kids playing in the street. The
building as proposed would create an unavoidably dangerous driving situation in the
neighborhood.
(6) The proposed building's forty-foot height would block sunlight to the neighborhood
and prevent views of the mountains.
(7) The increase in commercial usage is not in keeping with the quiet neighborhood.
The neighborhood's homes have large setback and big yazds. The proposed commercial
structure has neither.
Please keep me advised of any meetings or hearings regazding this proposal.
Thank you for listening.
Sincerely,
Bart Costello
Agenda Item # .~~ Page # ,-~~` _
Bartle~y A. Costello, Jr.
1650 38 Street, Suite 201 W
Boulder, CO 80301
Phone: 303-442-7200 Fax: 303-444-3304
Mazch 25, 2003
CERTIFIED MAIL NO: 7001 2510 0004 4502 7543
City of Boulder Planning and Development Servicas
P.O. Box 791
Boulder, CO 80306-0791
Dear Mr. Cole:
You left a message at my office today that the city is going to approve the Culver Court
mixed use development at 1540 28`h Street. I'm sad that we were not able to work this matter out
so please accept this letter as a request for a hearing on this matter. I'm always open to further
discussion on this issue.
Sincerely,
~^.
~ (
~~~L ~
i `\~
Bartley A. Costello, Jr.
BAC:aj
Agenda Item # S~ Page #<a? 5
Bartle~y A. Costello, Jr.
1650 38 Street, Suite 201 W
Boulder, CO 80301
Phone: 303-442-7200 Fax: 303-444-3304
Mazch 28, 2003
Don Durso
Citv of Boulder Planning and Development Services
1739 Broadway, 3`d floor
P.O. Box 791
Boulder, CO 80306-0791
Re: Culver Court Mixed Use Development
Dear Mr. Durso
This letter is to confirm my email to you today and my earlier letter of March 25, 2003 that
I am requesting an appeal in this matter. Could you please send me an email when you receive this
letter and confirm that you've received it. Thank you.
Sincerely,
~7
~~~~~--~ ~':-~- ~
Bartley A. Costellq Jr.
BAC:aj
Agenda Item # `~ ~ Page # a~~
Don,
I hereby, on behalf of the Islar- ~ ~enter of Boulder, would like to appeal
this decision based on two mair ::oncems of ours:
1- The height of the building is of utmost concern because our little
building across from this project will no ionger see the sunshine half of
the day, half of the year.
2- The trafflc due to this project wiil increase dramatically and the pubiic
parking space will very much be reduced for the members of our church due to
the businesses that this project will bring along with the dwelling units.
The traffic safety along Culver Court and Marine Street will be even more
affected due to the already narrow stretches.
Please include this email statement for the BURA.
I will send you a more detailed appeal for the May 22nd Planning Board
Hearing.
Sincerely,
-Yahia Laouar
Treasurer- Islamic Center of Boulder.
(720) 304 7588
Agenda Item #~ Page # ~'7
Bart Coetello
1650 38W Street, Suite 201 W
Boulder, Colorado 80301
(303) 442-7200
Apri18, 2003
"Ta ~ ~a.) L1~RRAoo
P_M~DQ CLZ`( P~N~,$-
~3-qq1-32f1.1
~1M'T~+'~~l~l ~~1~.,
Re: - Proposed high rise building on Culver Court and 28th Sheet in Boulder
- Plannimg Board hearing on April 16, 2003 ~t 6:00 pm in City Coancil Chamben
Dear Neighbor,
5ame of you may not have heard of the plans to build a 40-foot hll buUdina on
Culver Court. This proposed retaiUcondo project would be built just south of the U.S.
Betilc building on the southeast comer of 28th and Arapahoe. See the anclosed map.
"Ihese plans could directly affect you as a nearby properiy ownet. The Bouldec
City Planning Deparnnent has just appmved the 40-foot tall project, which includes
variations to the Land Use Code such as:
- height limitation
- PeT~B ~4~~ents
•landscapin8•
Please see the attached notice from the City.
If you don't went to see a 40-foot tall shvchuc in the neighborhood, if you don't
waat to increase the already tight parking, and if you don't want to lose the quaint feei to
the naighborhood, please write the City of Boulder or better yet ~g8d thc Plannia¢
Hoetd heazin¢;
Pl.naia~ H~a~e~d Muio~ a~t tar M~y 22, 2Q03 ~L (~OY pm. atz
Boulder Cily Council Ch~mben, second floor
Municipal Building (southwest comer of Broedway and Canyon)
1777 Broadway
Bouldec, C0. 80306
'Ihis is not a final decision av yet. You help end input is needed.
Thank you,
3 O~ C~.~~
san co~uo ~
Owner : 2825 Marine Stneet (old Hospice building, built in 1917)
Agenda Item # _'~ P Page # ,~51~
Bart Costello
1650 38`^ Street
Suite 201W .
Boulder, CO 80301
(303) 442-7200
Boulder Urban Renewal Authority
13`h Street Conf. Room
1720 13`h Street
Boulder, CO
Apri123, 2003
RE: Review of Culver Court (1540 28`h Street) Mixed Use Project
Summar~omments bv neiehbor onnosed to proiect as currentlv constituted•
I. FOREMOST: There are plans to downzone this writer's adjacent property at
2825 Marine Street from TB-D to HR This issue needs to be resolved before
consideration of the applicant's conditional height exception from 35'to 40'. If the
writer's property is downzoned, the additional5' height exception cannot be made.
II. APPLICANT HAS NOT MEET ITS BURDEN THAT ITS PROPOSAL
MEETS THE BVRC DESIGN GUIDELINES:
Most important are double underlined (bolding added):
•~ Break down the mass of the building
For human scale and visual interest, break down the mass of the building, horizontally and
vertically, into a hierarchy of volumes. Do not create a large monolithic structure. If the
building exceeds two stories along a sidewalk or main interior path, consider stepping-back
the upper stories (above the second story) 10 or more horizontal feet from the facade.
Note: This building is about 180' long and 60' wide x about 40' high
•~ Provide pedestrlan breaks In long buildings
Long buildings can act as a barrier to convenient pedestrian circulation within the site and to
adjacent destinations. Provide a break or a passageway in the building where needed for
pedestrian convenience (in most cases, at least every 350 feet). It should be located and designed
to be visible from a distance, attract frequent use, and feel safe. Open-air pedestrian passageways
(with or without overhead cover) are generally more visible and more inviting than interior
hallways. This can be an attractive, successfu] location for store entries, window displays, and/or
restawant or cafe seating.
Agenda Item # `~~ Page #,~~
S.I.C. Transition to adjacent bulldfngs
Consider varying building height and massing to make a visual transition to adjacent
buildings. Particularly respect the scale and massing of adjacent residential buildings (for
example, along west side of Folsom and north side of Spruce).
Note: This building dwarfs all of the buildings, both residential and commercial, in the entire
area. Especially the nearby residential buildings and the mosque.
S.l.D. Protect views to the west
Arrange building massing to protect views to the west from public spaces on and near the site,
such as streets and sidewalks. Also see Guideline 3.1.G.(above)
Note: This building takes all west views from public spaces on the near the site, including streets
~and sidewalks.
-i• IS. Preserve and capitalize on views to the west Locate buildings and open space to preserve and
take advantage of views to the west, northwest and southwest from public spaces on and near the
site, such as from streets and sidewalks. Also capita]ize on sun exposure, especially from the
south and west. Submit photographs with the application showing views from the site and from
adjacent sidewalks. When the project's effect on particularly significant views from nearby
streets or properties is in question, consider creating a photo simulation, either by
overlaying a to-scale drawing of the proposed building(s) on a panoramic photograph of the
site or by scanning a photo of the site into a computer and adding a computer-genarated
perspective of the building(s) to it.
Note: Applicant needs to provide photos or simulation for BURA to consider
3•6•A• Provide useable outdoor open space
City standards require that useable open space be provided for commercial buildings over 25 feet
~ high and some residential projects. (Refer to BRC 9-3.2-6 and 7.) All BVRC projects are
' encouraged to provide useable outdoor open space, whether or not required by tha code, even if it
is just a small area. This space may be combined with or adjoin an adjacent property's open space
Examples of useable open space include: outdoor cafe or restaurant seating, a plaza with seating,
a play area, a picnic area, or a wide azcade for sh~oiling along store fronts. Public right-of-way,
landscaping filled in around buildings and parking lots, and simple paths are not considered
useable open space. Roofrop dining and other rooftop activities can be a land efficient way to
provide useable open space and at the same time take advantage of views and full solu access.
(1'he City code specifies what rooftop space and indoor open space can be counted toward an
open space requirement.) The type and character of the useable open space should be
influenced by the surrounding land uses (e.g. retail, office) as weU as by the prospective user
group (e.g. workers, shoppers, youth). Programming specific activities for the space will help
make it a lively place.
3.6.B. Locate and design open space to encourage use
To ensure that useable open space is well-used, it is essential to carefully locate and design it. The
space should be located where it is visible and easily accessib]e from public areas (building
entrances, sidewalks). Take views and sun exposure into account as well. The space should be
well-buffered from moving cars, so that users can enjoy and relax in the space. The space may be
visible from streets or intemal drives, but should not be wholly exposed to them. Partially enclose
the space with building walis, freestanding walls, landscaping, raised planters, or curbside
Agenda Item # S/~ Page # , ~U
parking to help buffer it and create a comfortable "outdoor room."
3.6.C. Avofd locating open space at busy intersectfons
Most street comers are not a good location for useable open space, as almost all BVRC
intersections carry heavy traffic. Plazas and other open space features at high-traffic street comers
may be amactive to look at or pass by, but are not very comfortable to use. Street corners that
may be acceptable locations for useable open space are: • Intersections with light tra~c (for
example, 26'" and Spruce) or • Locations where ihe space can be se( above the /evel of the street
and be well-bufje red with vegetation and/or a low wall orfence.
Note: Could design two separate building with open space in 6etween.
3•7•A• Exceed City landscaping standards
The City code specifies site landscaping requirements, including amount and size of plant
materials, berm dimensions, maintenance, and plant replacement. The Site Review criteria
encourages projects to exceed these standazds (BRC 9-4-11(i)(Z)(B)(iii) .
Note: Applicant wants variations to the landscaping BVCP Code: 8' tree lawn on 28`~' St.
where 10' is required; 6' tree lawn along Culver where 6' is required.
A STREETS (slowest tra~c)
26th Street
Spruce
29th Street
Marine Street
28th Street Frontage Road
Culver Court
LANDSCAPE STRIP
4•1•B• Minimum width for "A" and "8" street landscape strips is B feet.
The laadscape strip along "A" and "B" streets must be at least 8 feet wide. This width ensures
healthy street h~ees, precludes tree roots from heaving the sidewalk, and provides adequate
pedestrian buffering. 4.I.C. A row of street trees must be planted Street trees must be planted in the
landscape strip 30 feet on center. Select large street trees from the list of approved species in the
DCS Table 3-1, right column. Adjust the spacing for curb cuts, intersections, light poles and trees
on abutting lots, as specified in DCS Section 3.03(B).
J• 1_G• "A" &"B" street sidewalks must be 6 to 8 feet wide
The minimum width for sidewalks on "A" streets is 6 feet. On "B" streets it is 6-8 feet, depending
on surrounding conditions, such as land uses, leve] of pedesirian activity, traffic volumes,
building setback, adjoining sidewalk widths, and desired street character. The Transportation
Department may wish to install a mid-block crossing in some ]ocations. Any crossing should be
incorporated into the design of the sidewalk and landscape strip.
NOTE: Applicant wants 5'sidewalk. 6' is required by BURA Guidelines as well as the BVCP.
Agenda Item # _5/3 Page #~
~
QQ
~
..
r
a
m
~
~
~
~
~
~^~
~d
~
va
c~
~
~'v
~
~
sideYvalk viewDSCN0125.JPG (1600x12QQx16M jpeg)
raoftap view i~3DSCN0144.JPG (1600x1200x16M jpe9)
~
~
~
~
a
a~
~
~
~
~
J';
~
`d
~
ua
~
~
~J
e ,
"Gar ~ . ~'.65~., r ,... ...
. t t"~:~n. ~~~'s% . _ .
~ . . d ~ , , . '~,:: , _~::~
. ..+ x . ~ ..:~, . . ,:. i . .
F ,,
, ., .. ~~. .,..-:: ~.w... :... '.,, . ~..;
, - ; . .~ ....,. .. ,
_
....' _ '.. ~ '~ :;~ '~°+~ ~''' ~;
- " , " ~ ;
, ~
" _ " ,~..._. i ~~
~~ ~~;, ~~rr ,
.; _,a.,~ ~
~ ; ~;f~ ~
~ `~ ~ ~,_ -r~u;:~.~ ~i~~~~"~d~~'~.,,,~+-~'S~~ ,,~ _
_ ~.. ,
paricing DSGNO'139.JPG (160Qx1200x16i~A jpey)
~r
.~
~
~
bA
~
~
~
~I
~
~
~
~
~.r
CS
~
C
~
CA
Q
aFrantIXl97.jpg (1386x661x16Mjpeg)
~
OQ
A
7
C
~
~.
'.
~
3
~
b
~
~
~
~
-J
Jl
m
~
~
~
~
~
0
N
~
O
O
O
0
a
y
a
Agenda Item # ~?~ Page # 03~
~
OQ
!D
~
~+
A7
~.n
~
f~
3
~
r~i
1
~o
~
ara
~
~
~
Firepface~l2r.jpg (160Dx120Qx16M1Pe9}
~` f ~.
~
00
A
~
d
m
~
'.
~
3
~
,
'~Z
~
b
~
~
~ ~/ ;~ ;:
~
Y
H
y
Y
n
x
~
~
z
y
d
,,..,
.,
~ _~ __ ~
.
~Y;
,,:.=- ``
_ .
.. _. ..
~~ :~' ~=`'~~-
----'~ ---~.~~~~,-~T`-;- .~~ ---- _ _- -
i
~
~
~
_
¢
~
~
~
~
3
~
,~,
~
b
w
ua
~
~
~j
i~
1
.iTi.a~tr
~, ~ TUKC Z!
~~ f.
s ,,. . ,~
. ., ._. .:
__ _ ,~ ,
~ ._,~
, ~~
~ - ~>c
l "~ ~ '~'
~ ~ _~ / _3~}- _ _... _. _. .- - _
~
l iE ! ,
ATTACHMENT E
V t~1,~) -`Yt~ JYl ~C~X ~ ~~-~ ~ 1
2. ~ z S ~CW i v~2.
Agenda Item #~ Page # '`~~
lixis~i~.~ b~~Ic~i~~S Cxec~it l~vli~
P~p ~DS C~ c, ~u-~ ~~ i v.-Q
ct,~, - 35 '
~ ~" ~
~~ld = q-o .~--~
~~ ~,.,,~ -~,, ~~~-~.,,~ ~fi
2~b 25 ~~ ~ e
~m ~-~ ~ ~,l v, ~ ~s-v~
Agenda Item # .5~ Page #~
ATTACHMENT F
' : _ '_~+~' °~ =.
CULVER COURT
BOULDER, COLORADO
MIXED USE URBAN INFILL
For poon Callen & Company
Culver Court is the redevelopment of an
ageing 3/4 acre strip shopping center
located near Boulder's busiest intersec-
tion. The complete site rehabllitation
includes a new redefined Culver Street
with street front parking, tree lawn pnd
sidewalks; a new multi-purpose path
frontfng the 28th street side of the devel-
opment, which connects the slte to the
Crossroads Shopping Mpll, and p new
south facing plaza for cafe seating.
ProJect Includes 10,000 sf retail, 16 own-
ership dwelling units wlth flats and loffs,
and 32 underground parking spaces. A
majority of the dwelling units have stun-
ning mountaln vlews.
VAN METEfl WILLIAMS F
AFCHITEGTUflG•URPAf Agenda Item # ,7~ Page #~~
~NNFNANpSCO.OE
oUp (~
a°~ N
!~m~ ~
nN~ ~
~~ O
o ~
~ O
~
~^
\/
0
3
a
0
~
~
y
~
m
~~
~a~~
~~o u~~
^-.N~~p
~
ao7ro-•
~ ~ n
m c
~o~3C
~
3
~
va
~
~
n,
~
~
~
~
~ a
~
~ ~
~ ~
~
~
m o
°fQ 3
~ N
~ .0
~ ~
f , 0 S
w ~ ~
~n'
~
m
~
m
~
r~
u ~
,
~~
~
~
I
~
1
i
i
~~
i
~
,;
~
,
;
~,
,;
,
i I
I j ~
i !
1
1 ~~
1
I ~
i ~~
~
1
1
I
I ~
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
1
1
i
~
1
1
~
,
Client
Dean Callan & Company
isazsm m~T
Boultlec CO 80303
;
1
~~: ~v~
~
I
i
i
i
~-~~~. ~l
i
\
0
I °m°°'~
~ -
- - ~~ ~
_- - ,
v `
P f
~ ~ 1
~ v u
~.~ .,
-Y I
1 N.
~ 1 .:
°~ I,
rc~cei-~.rc ' .
i :
I .
.
..
I
w
W
N
~
.
. '
m - MN
'
N ~ ~
_ '
~5 f
M' I
~~~ ' . I v
~~
~~ 1
1
o ~,~~
o ~
aFCpO5FD35iOFY ' o ^~~~~
6URDINGNT119.9995: k
OGGrtauhDL.EYELFETaL so
ANO M'O STGRIES OF I
fEvIOFTMALPH~ -
0
a /
l ~ "
`
\ ~
~
~ f
v v ...9r. i
, .z
~
~,~, g
Jp
VO
~p
U
/
/
Q
__-_- _ -• ,/.
%
f ~
\ , ~
~ pm'~.zz ~~ ~~.
a~...°~`n~o:nn~ ~.~..9:.. /~/
N~ ~.~o~t ~
~ ~ ~~~
~
- G-~ ~ -~ ~,-------
SI'fE PLAN
Culver Court
Site Review Re-Submittal
i sao zatn srr~t
BoWdec Cobrado
January 6, 2003
~
~
~
~
~
I
I
~~ ~~
~
I f ~
~ i°4s_
~
I
I
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
/~
i
~ ° ~~ i
H'if'JAHCEAYE
OE: a.3Wi PI7
~OECS.90JAn
12~ NGON
~
l
I
I F ... . ~.
~/ I
~
wo-
1~ ~~
SOLAR SHADOW STUDY
~
~ U ° ~~-I
\v
.avn.v.woE
~ ~
C
r`/ I ~
LJ ~
a
m
~
~
~
vicwrrY r~aa
PROJEGT OATA
1)LOTA2A ~5.2645~=0EiACRE:
2) BUILDING PREA
' ToMI SFGross = 32,2c'S SF (o-cWCmg PaAirc Gorcge Level)
' Total Refail Grass = 9~99 SF
Tc'd 2esiderral Gross = 22,Z6 SF
3) CENSrtY 91:1 FA¢
4) FISJOOPLNN Pr jer s wrfhin 1C0-y flcoC plain -see flccdFlcin 5YU?ies
Architect:
Van Meter ~Iliams Pollack~
qRCHI1ECNRE. l~N OE51GN
7529 Maket SYreet
Secontl Foor
o~,~~, co aoa~z
aos.z9e.iaao
~I~ ~ -
~
NOiES
\
1
LEGcNO
:re or aae . .. . .
- *c
unosca~o . . . .
. .~s
XAIER !IEQt . . . . . - NN
CJS ME(EA .. . . . . . .GN
¢~cmrc unm . . . . .un
PoNER PqE . . . .. . .PP
PAfMWG ~AfE. _.. .PS
QfINWi......-. CO
$Tr~FEf 114Y~ . _ . . . A
m8roxe eax . . . . .re
mtcxaxc unc -r -
wxm uNE -v -
manic swu Pa.F . .~
wwoicu+ anuP.....
' .xca
a m¢ w/ muN
wxi~
rc aue~z ~
~~
DEIIDVWS TiaE-i W/ 1RIINK OIPMEIER O
N
s~ate: 1" = aa'
~
o m w ~
EXISTfNG CONDIl10NS PLAN
CULVER COURT
28TH AND ARAPAHOE
BOULDER,COLORADO
l! ~ ~X &,~„~,~
onsulting gineers rveyars
S.W ssn rvect vau.r, uavb VoJ
<yn W - }6i
OsqnM G1 ~A b ScYe ~ 9meY 9raet t Pwns na
r".m
Ora..~ bY ~H 10/2t(02 L~19 Pvgv a( 1 02435-1
- Fe.'am ~i~ ~
G~afam ev ~M 02<35C
~- PFOSCi BENPINPrlN IS Ott OF 9WLDFlt BFNCMMPRN ~F-Y BEYG A
d15FlFD't 0.u iHE SW1N-EFS! ENO CF 1HE BR:p(£ AT 1ME 291H
SIREEi ACf£g RpPO PN~ BWIJEi CRE-( MiM M' El£'ailIXJ CF
52B].SS FE£T, plY OF 6Wt-ER ~PNM. A0~ 0.44 FFEi iO CONIQti
Gtt lF BOIR-FA ELVATGNS i0 1929 NGW
2 IXIS i0P0IXAFHIC SLRVEY IS NO' PN IMPROVEME~T SUFYFY PLAi~ CR
'LANO AIRVET PUi~. NO 9WNOFRY OEIERMINAi1CN5 XAVE BFFN YPpE.
Q9 PP1 SETRCHE$ PREPA4m.
llE LOLPPON OF TIE VINTES, E%IS11NG tOGO, NI~ IX15TNG
iuPROV£NEN15 31OWN H~StEON PRE P64- ON INFOHNniION PFO'lI~ED
BY OTIQi51Y4L01NG Qi: OF 90VL~EH AfR1Al YAPPING. FlElD 41RY£Y
BY OIS%El BRFREL ~Fa%1NG N0. B~s-32 OPiE- 6/}2/Of. SNiT. rox
PbOQRFS ~NG ~5 NOT RE^aeGx9BtE fOR WFpRUAPON PRON~m 9Y
"mms swn. cox n assw.hs wc recccuuwos ix+*'me
iocnr.arv av na ununcs zuo ewsnHC cxnors s: nm vrniFlm
PWOR LO PNY OIGPNG ON. OR PDJ~CENt i0 lXE A1B.EGT PROPQiLY.
3. iY.E IPEFS IOENTFlm ON Tn'I$ ~PPMNG kAY .ffFRESENT N 9NqE 1REF
IXt lNE fFNRr FL POINT MPIIN T QllStR OF OIXEP. $Wlll£R lftE6
wnuc au ~roar was Mnoc ro ~ocnic ai i~s wTMiu n~c aiwrs
wRCCnv aa+nuerRS. Na cuue,vu~ is cpo~mum ina: ui m~s
wTMin w~ anRwc~.xs nnvic e¢~+ ~acai[n
<- IXIS CRPMNC IS BAS4D ON A FlEt- 41RYM LdAREIED NJ ~/3i/03
G~O 9/10/O1.
5- NOTC£ ACCOR~ING i0 WLIXiA00 tAW. Yf%I NUSi COMMENCE NNY
l£C4 PCTINJ bASED ON PNY OES£CT iN MIS SIRYF" lNli'.M RiRF£
1Eqq5 AFT'31 TW FlRSi OIR'OVEF 91W OFFECT. IN NO EYCNT. MAY
MIT PCIICN BASED IIGON ANT OffELi IN 1X15 9JRVEl' 8E fIJMLENCm
ANR~ iXRY iEN 1£MS FFOH iHE OAi£ 410Nfi HEAEW-
Qt5-1.S-80.~05(3xi
., ^ I
~-
Y ~
THIRD FLOOR
~ ~ ~
~ ~
~ ~ ~
~ ~
~ ~
-----------t--- ~ ~
~-- ,
~ , ~
o , o, ~ o ~o o ,
~: ~ ~ i
~~~ ~ i , ~ ~
i i i
~ ~ i~ ~
~.s~.. u ~^aS ~ ~ uu ~
I ~ I
v ~ mI ~ m a
-__--~ ° I L-- I_
__ _ _________________~
1 I 1
I i 1
~ ~ ~
~ I "T
~ ~
GROUND FLOOR
~
--~
-__'~
----~
i i
~ ~
Client
Dean Callan & Company
i sio zsm srr~r
Bauitler, CO 80.?03
SECOND FLOOR
UNDERGROUND PARKING LEVEL
w;.:~~'
Culver Court
Site Review Re-Submifitai
1540 28th Street
Boulder, Colorado
January 6, 2003
Arch'rtect:
Van Mefier ~Iliams Pollack,.
ArtGmECiut~ • II~ IFscrv
tszs rVtaixer meef
$ECOtIC~ f~OIX
oenver, Co 8020z
303298.1480
www.vrrrvm com
~~ - - --II~~II~--
EAST ELEVP~TION / CULVHR GOURT --~~,„~~„~-~
_~~
.~.~. ~.~.~. ~~
~. ~. -. y.
~.
: .:~i'~ .: .: :: :: :. :: ::
; ~. ~--
~. ~•. ~. •. ~. - - iv~ am~
.'. ~L'..7 . ._ .:.:._ .:.
""yv ....
~.~.~ ~.~.
. ?~"~.. _. _.~``4.:;,. _. .
~
~ _ " . - s~~~
~~.~P"~„^•~ ~.,..
r~e~-z=c:~oc
~+ww ~az~
5~6=~3-9'~~~~
_lLW4G1MWRNPJg V
Ciient
Dean Callan & Company
1570 28~h Slreei
Badtler, CO 80.903
WEST ELEVA?ION / 28th STREET
Culver Court
Site Review Re-Submittal
1540 28th Sheet
Bouldec Colorado
January 6, 2003
-- -g~
>A2GNGG.W'
^1-
f 3A~~hi}e~t. I
Van Meter Williams Pollack,,, I
pRCHRECRIPE • {JRBM! ~9GN
1529 Maitcet SYreet ~
$ECOntl FlOOf
oen~~, co aozoz
303298.7480
~ ~ ~- I -~ --
~
..-:~.'.'_'.
I~t~T: . ~. .
. •~ ~~~^
). . . . ~. . . . . . .
~. . . .(' ~~m~r ~ .
. . . :'J-"I.( ~ . ~ . ~ . .
ElSF.
iLIfAiFt M_RTL cIOW6. T"P.
~w/ 6~
. . .~ .'
}.•.•~•~• ~._-~
~~. ~
~.~ .~ . .~ .C.~ _~~
~~~. ~. ~. . ~. ~. ~ ~•
~ ~ ~. ~. ~. ~. ~. .
~ .'. .'
~~ ~IW~/~. .~.
O~ ~I ~I ~ Nn . . :
~.,^. ~ ~wlST~N~E45~T19.
5]c3-i _ otLC OQ
~u ii unu - G~if JNTJa~
5~5=Ss /~
_ LO~~ PoIM WIiFtlW ]J^-~
NORTH ELEVATION
'~~
~ ~.Q
CD~'XTT-JJYFiPL51GING.TY+. ~OFOFif~TP~Ef~
~2~'~/~
TLFOFRLYF v
-easY },~n"s "` -~ ~~~ ~ ~e- ., . ..... ~2tOCK../6WGKTN. =dOP87v~
LDW FQM
Y+.
SlbiScBL.ClO{IA
- GGOUM1~P~!i/J-oR~ ~V~
_ 5~E_- V
_LOW PoIM~VlIMW 2°
_. ~ V
~GARpNG Gf~AGE
SEGTION
SECTION
~~ ~
- - TOGOFPAPA~T
~~d~~'~ /~
TOGGFP.?F v
aU' h6WE
tOW roM
S
X'.i
TnPm ~2~
b'4
SE<LiJO ROJF~
~ i-S=6WSO+T
~~
_ Si96=.Zg /~
_IDW4Y]IMWrtWW~ ~
3Q
~ PM aGPR+GE~
Client
Dean Callan & Company
uio zam s~f
BoWtler, CO 80303
SECTION
Culver Court
Site Review Re-Submittal
i sao zam stt~r
Bouidec Colorado
January b, 2003
".:~
Architect:
Van Meter ~Iliams Pollacku
ARC71nECNRE • V~N O~GH
1529 McTket SM1eet
Second Fbor
Demer, CO &Y202
'.,Q1298.1480
wwwvmwo.com
II - - -I
n° ;
~O~
r=
>
P,~~
a
I%
dTM~
A M
r4
~Y°a
I''
r
~
awwnu
~TM
n ahmsl
avogn rn
W
wc n
~
o artm
~<
(~
Developer
Dean Callan 8~ Company
1510 28th Street
Bouider, CO 80303
._.____~ ARiiPAHLL~AIfi}~!/E
. l'°m (STAIE H/CJIWAY NO. 7J
. 9c.. ~o. se~"~-a --~~~- _ _ _ __.__
p" ~` ~ I sn
I-I ~P ~ I ~~ ~- ~ p ~ ~ +~{ 't db
s
I/ ~ /~:
~` ~ ~ s'~ ~ /~ul~ " ~`~, `,~'
~ ~~ ~ _ .~ i,
'~ ~~ ~ '~ - ~~ ~~a ~ ~
3~ ~. ~~i, ~,~a I ~_° g~, i' ;,
i €~ j~ '~°` ~ ^. ~j
~ I
' ~ ~ I d wuu ~~3 ~ I c ~ n I~ :
~ 9p ~~ ~
1 ~
~ ce~~ , uwa¢ ~ \ N !~~ S
~ h ~5]M2 l ' ~II~~ $`°
'I~ I~ I~ I~MYPIi ~n4P4IIm~[ +~ A__- I~.! a ve~ ~P I
~,}s I ~
R~ ~
~rxoe~ew~hx ~
i~~ ~
?~<~~OI1
FptFSf~
~I)
PRCP65F- ~lll-INC
FF =9211)
LOwER LEHELI~fi=~3:
~ sroww~
s~w ww
fF =826>
y
. a~ 6
~
~ ~
i
~ 4 ~
\ li ~~
°o ~t flA
~v
m. +,
~ ` ~,
~
;.. ~
~.^x
- ~
~
°..
- \
~~ ~ o sf ~,
. ,3
~ e ~~ m
4
~
~ ~ fl. ,1
yl .
~ . _~^'i i ~..
0>
-2-OS
n
n
y
z ~
z mwere
P.W t
nrx a~
uio a~r~w
o C~. 4,
I °.e
~ ' ~Y„~ `~~
~ •
,
..i~-n ~'~ w ~s .
_ e~m eav'6.~ um ~e ,
nae
B1' ~
,o,
J w,~us~~''~
'
e,s`'::c
cs:~,r: :
_'_' _ _ ' ~' ~, ' .,
¢ :
~
~ 20 ' .e
'b,
.1 6,
~
:'y.
~~ .. ~
`~ xenaidBi's+o
/ . ! /uvnm ~'. .
' b.
uxm
•r i.ra
szm ~~.., /41.:".....
,"~ ;-// ~.^~u~.,~~ _ ~ °,
. %
~g'4 ~ +~W
ia ~ ~
a~s e~ I s
~ ~~~~~ ~q ~~ \ .
~c ~'v, d' 'ar a ~ :3a
~ i ~5, '
~wvgn ~ h f
(ttnreiTe. ~~~ v$ - , .
9 SJ
es ~,>
/
/,
~'~ p
~ ~~ E
~j ~ / ; .4 ,
, /
$,, / ~'s
'~°,~ Q8 K '9.95
Culver Court
Site Review Submittal
Boulder, Colorado ~
October 21, 2002 L
^1
NOTES
~ ~°~ .^~~ a•~~, mE ~, :o ~.^~ ~~~`,~' ~. ~
t(i BNLLYUE 9ULL BE .1L IFAST 65" ~lOW ltM ~ FGrt0A1NM Pi
wNSGF e.iEAS W W 4MP Pf IXE ENSTIC PW WW MIFN. S1SfFH. ~~ MPhF ~Il BE
dw~ n~~ Sm'a~taF vErtwi wu ec ~¢tln~en
. ~~ ~ .~o ~,~~a n.~.~s
~^µ~~;~. ~:~~~°~.rsRE~,~~„~Ea,.~~~~,~
,~ ~~.~ ,~ ~ ,~ ~~ ,~ ~,o», ~~
~~ a~~: a wo~m a. a»~ m~~ a,. ~~~ m
:~",~~~~~ ~ ~~~~` ~~,~,~~~~~~"~'
Cp~slsJ.~6' ~6i ~ dPE4 ~~cd¢ w6R~E Ab PNMIG NGS IX~PI~ WN6 011EAM.~
iF-, ¢ai FI£VA*IPS 9~Pw ~i a1PH INO dil'Ta Y~ NMIXE QV[fS
o.s.~,c we.~ wwa ~ ~na:
ws .~ ee ~ : swa ~.wv ran~uu~ ro me sraa s.xrt
w+s s..us~~ w+iE°.e~wu.i.~am~~u~s~"ww vmv mrurw~c s~w. ewre ~a~o~
LEGEND
~ ~~o ~~ ~,na
-u- ~~ ~~,r«~
. ~i>.. - pIS.ING CMiWR
" W. ~04- ~J! 6£ PIINI
sse Fnc~NG IDOi ¢EVPTW
-asex- e snNa sow. gnw wnu:~c
e~avagn swu s.~m w/~'xas
y evwogc aaw arcet~a
(~ pRNwacBASNOm(NFTW(EGSIING)
6 ~ NSP IX POt6
(~ OFNNP(£ BP9A ~E9GVA-pi (iflGP03D)
ES5 ~Fp q pp~
~ ELSRIG 9+FLT ROW
a ~ e~ aF~o40 0.~1 eaxvOMv
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ H~5ICRIC B~9N 9qW~PM
N
Scdl¢: 1" = 20'
~
PRELIMINARY
GRADiNG AND DRAINAGE PLAN
~n.~X & ~,~.~.
l! ~
consulting ginee~
~yors
~
~~~«~ .
<~ w i
mgm ~v BJW Oee xcie swks i omvis nu
A~
JPS t0I21I~ 1'=20' e3e
P 2 C2435-2
~ ey
- Pnm'n fm Oa1e Pmryt na.
OPA 02435C
. . _
~
ArchRecta
Van Meter Wllllams Pollack,LLP
Architecture & Urban Deslgn
1525 Market Street
Second Floor
Denver CO 80202
3b3.2S8.1480
~ I~~ II~
/ I
1
I'
I''.
I'.
I~!.
~
~~ ~ ^ S5 ~ 15. ~ , Lfv ~52 6.)9 ~
u~-ss__~'~y_;j`~RA~ A/IAPAH0.~AYEN//E
~RS"`d ~s'x' o _
- (STA7EH/pllYAYNQ 7f
\ -"s\
1
I F[',~ND
-so--a_ ~,srW~ s.w..a. a e .nwmac
~ .o-+:- crosiwc smAU ~n w~wrwac
-~`-.-.- mmxe waiex w/rmc x:nwwr
-~ _- ~ siwc cas
-u-w_ [yq. ryG O'rtRI1EPO PowFR
- ~ - ~ - bbTNG IEIII.CYYUxIGTWS
a EY611XG WPhR VkYE
II W511NGFlPEXttWUIT
PRCPo49 d~X-0Ui
y ~ ~~ liA 141E3
B WPRR W/ FlPE Hl9RPNT
FAW~ W41FA 9RN2
MCPoST ftff 4AH2
~ pqCq]TaJ i11mFA(FWXO POWFA
-v FYCP0.4- 451ME
ca~v¢n smvu sw< wMnraaF
aaoao~ muc
~
I
~
~~
~
Developer
Dean Callan ~ Company
1510 28th Street
Bouider, CO 80303
Culver Court
Site Review Submittal
Boulder, Colorado
October 21, 2002
Scale: 1" = 20'
~
a ia m u
PRELIMINARY
UT1LffY PLAN
0
~n ~X &,~,~.~.
lE mn 1[ing rngmeers surve}ors
m~~ . ~.~~
c,an «. -
anv oe.. sm, s~.e, scem z u.<.~s ~
.Ny„e ,r
~qs io/v/oz r=zo' ar z azus-z
s
~, . ~~. ~
~m e
~PA 02435C
r ¢
~
NOTES
v ui a: i urunes s~ui cawi. wm nr om ar e~.ww omc u+v ccxsm~rna+ nnxoereos
z wr,rw. rv~xE gv.ex rnvs um vxxa uxc sus ~.u ae o~au~~rto ar ~ nue
~ eunnixc vEVUrt uvuc+naa.
3. NL xEW WAIEA M9 SaWtPRY ¢M£P 4AN~ T W5 !p IX6TYG Y(JXS SIPLL ~ NME BY
~tt (.~K /~T :XE OF~£11~PfA'S bPPi4.
5LL ttrvNEC11dv4 LO FJ]STNC YTIIT6 SwNl BE WxE W P wq~ 50 AS i0 ulrv~uiZ£
O~SA~PTGN w S~NCE i0 FSSIMG Y4A5.
ccnnra cr nE uwms Ewsne sao, vw ecsv+c nmarwwrs siwm xv¢ax
s~`e~o au inr~unaw aaavmm er amos iucumxc ax a ecu~ncrs eFmu
e~ frs mc is xor ~ e~ roa uvaunna vvmioEn e~r oTMmimsmn 2oxf4Y
~ r~n vw~mm a~~v Gw'xc ax.`rn~:n.ama? *o`~mi ve.z~cr w~r°~~E`
s- rame. o~wwrnaa~mz vAa°H~ nr°i~ rvic a- nNU oua rm~xe"`v"ia ssre rra.
~- ssv.a.nw eE*wo+ m~s nrvn uwrvs s~ui ee ~ uwiw~ ar ia ~cr.
*m TMca.w . s.xoiai sr.a..*ae .uu s+..i ae
wwra re me v~ra<r ~n ~~ ~`
a. cucr um.in cs.crnws ro~ wnnns sxw. ec ca~mixnnn ..m ~wn.u¢u
Architect:
Van Meter WUllams Pollack,LLP
Archltecture 8~ Urban Deslgn
7529 Market Street
Second Ploor
Denver CO 80202
3a3.298.,480
II~ I ~~
~--
~
i ~
Develooer
Dean Calian & Company
I570 28th Street
Bauider, CO 80303
LEGEND
I ~ Shade Trees
~
I i Ens~~3=4e~s
~
~ I~i / ~Mr Et:.f .
I n~,a _ ~rdre ~,~.,Ue
I
9
~
I
6 • ~ z-v~
sa ~wi c~r r4
4
. and /v vvr.RCCSn__.
I
Shrubs
~
~
~
.vl
Y FeGT...:3pcgrvccG
~
I
'
eall I u^"-`T""qn~r wn
I ~ "S
i ~.~s.. . r~s.sv~-
I~ ~En . +us~ .a,zsDC~k4s~'
C~ `"iKl
:~ss Fr a.«r:.r~
~ 5:.'s p~luk Ms ~n-
~ ~
P-.c+usx~¢CC5[cGrien
I
I ~ ~c
GruGlaG .a
G~'Ueesef`cNr~cs
Paving
i
'~- t3-'~wse:cm=.cc:cv..y
~1 ; ~ ~mv~se~~,m~~s=~
~~ . ~e~.~P _
Evergreen Trees
i~ S
~ ~IZ.:cc d~t tn:~¢
=!-zc.v5~~s
Ornamental Trees
/"~ ~ . _
~'~~ • J ~ ~.acrm+n:.s~ 4r.:en^l
4~f
` ~-lT='~'~~J ~c.-ea-~~.
G~.:~s` us~-srsc'e
Ground Gavers/ Vlnes
~ 7.-z3*-Crcr 31:.eaTCZZ-wr
~-~"; n_r..
~ '~r oU-. ~.Nr: ae~.:~, s._. ~,
~ry-M•~+zSr~n .
a.yz~wT~o-~
Street Furnlshinge
` 3cc.ez
~+ ~ -~~.esaGGbz
'4J .~~.e.-. ~-s
~ x!GJ-rreC 2! s
~ ~_..'~m..-'amr~-cs
LANDSGAPE PLAN
PLANT NOTES
t:.a v'~cr.r ~re;a sn~n ~er sc~ ~aw~s os me,ame~;-.a-. ~~uc~o,. ~u~~.-y-e, (aa~)
- ,~ ber o~e y~cde. .41 tees sFCil'ce tc.lea cM bu aGP~ o% eGuvCZ:it P+I plar? mcieicls
sFCU fcv c~l .. e. Zvirs cr amer mr,rc:nmem mcersc:s, exceyfo~ bvrbp. -e~ravcd fron i-~nk
a:+d re~ ba:l vi iM1e P~crii Onor to ~lann9.
2 F 2Tbe pl '.rt~ida O reel' M wC I,, e GI reY 9 SFeI te
ocrd~eC '~F~ubl erv G ~~y Lorur 'I T:n !+cllte erifzC- ~Y ..e~d
~~or ro o~~
3-NI snvb ' I p r,ied I Hnn 3 fr ry" a:k rt. All =f.zA tr ~r
p~cm g s'nps a ae cer.rered oezvee c.rc cM sCew k. wlrs ~~'bu'np-ou' crecs-
G, Deveb~.ers shdl mwre r.nr ir~e Icrdsrape ~lar. I5 coordincCeL wi~i ti~e plc:is corz by oYner
r~uih_rrfs w tha*'1'e OraposEti 9'cE':~a, s'ori- crainc5e. or olhzr mr~s'ivcMOns 2ces noY
mrh.icf ru~ pre.luLe'installaYOn and ncimenc~ce a IcMxcOe ~E"^ert's on'Fis plan.
S.Pu sFrub beds ~cca-r to r,af orecs shc1 te edceC wnh rzyr. san ar c„prwa' eGuvclr.r
stezlel5a.
6. NI sFr~b ozi arrs sFC;i x nJCi: d wi': a Icyer of wcoC !w.-e n~~ or grevN cer weeC
tcmr fcbrlc ~c a Eep:h of C'. P_ar~.ncls cntl 5~ovrcca~r are-.s sf~all te :rvL+.rJ wirn c 3'
.cr of ehreCdai ba.x nulc5.
i.Riarro'NSV~c'ond~icrr-*a*erds cressrFOt'Fiwebee^corpcctedoresurbec'.,~y
mrs-w-non ociWy shcll be tYa~ouS-ry Ioosmect c-5cre sc I a-eM ~rs Shcll be irvarsorC,ec
c-he rote v~~es+tnree /,3) abic ycres ~er 1000 sGUCre feer oFlcrdsrape arsa.
6. Pll xd ~recs _nless ~ rw~se riare~.vll be socEed w~~h ic.vw.r.er Cemcr.d tlu grass blerd
AI s'cFes stezpa tt~cn &1 wll hcve eresbn qmrcl f brfc.
9.All la:idsccpe (dwn mateMCls wd yrass) wi0 be imya!a witi+on cummatic sysrem. Turf
wu'I Fave c 5prw zone. sFrubs ar.d rees in 5rctes wJl Fwe o cnp zo'e ariE
vere.,,~a~sirou ecwers (va,r oty-c eno m~e7 ~n f e m~e~oyer sc'ws.
10.Cofr.rccforsFCllver:"rycl:ma- ~GV~YMespriorM~i~IIC'an. Pcive'rvmberofyior
smtols si'all hwe pnarry cver the Guc.r,iry CesignaTed.
1:. ~er TO tie GMy af 6oulcer ~esiyn Cnd Cor5tTstlon 1~reetscaplnc Sicr.dords rOr aiI wGrk
wr-a~ wsu~ a~e~s.
12 ~ t+M Ci,.ll E:gireer D~cwi:5s or Gracsy aM U-~li+y I~r."orrru.vr~.
L. Th~s pbn rrcets or e~reeds Giy fi BoWder i:4sccpe ccde requ!remenR
~
~~~ sca~: t^=2o-0•
~;
;~ ~
,. T
~~"
s ~ e v i a AfChiteCC
Culuer Court Van Meter Wii6ams Po-Iack .uv
Site Review Sabmitt4l ~ Arch~~~
et
529MarketStre
Boulder. Colorado , E:~ s. sewnd Hoor
January 6
2003 -= Denver. C080202
, m.~e. 303298.1480
~
H~IEdde
rv~==~~ z`~
~~
~~ ~~
smqs~wmsuLLff
.,~ ~~
F ° ~
'
~~ ~ ~~,
~~ , ~~~
~~ -
~~
~.~
-
~
~
,~
~ ~
~ _~-.~s,~~.a~~~.
~
~a \
~ ~ ~
~ ~~~
~,~
~~
~,.~,~
~ ~
h~
~ ~
~au
~ m
~[
v..~n ~ CTiI'CFEW~O3yCCLOPl~00
°~" ~" ~ TF~C~iATE ~
~.,__ I FOF? SIDEWALK
j PLANTWG 3.03
TREE GRA7E FOR PUBLIC SIDEWALKS
a~w~. ~~~~
Ew~maxtiA ~~5~
~(~)
IMI~ ~ ~,
~
II ~.. wx i CRY~~IA.Offl~G.OPA00 .R m.~~'aooa
"INVB~i~ U" ~,„.~„,
`~'".9 i BICYCLERAq( I 2S2
INVER7ED - U BIKE RACKS
~LALG not ta s~Ale
L4ND5GAPE REQUlREMENTS:
mocrst ~ ~
mntwm.rBmtiffw~R~maMa ~
,~"a s.+ i arcoFSazostcacanoo ~
~ TF~S AND SHRU&S
~"~~~ PLAfYTING DEfA1L ~ 3.02
TREE AND SHRUB ALANTING DETAIL
a.~Ewi.~srE ~•s~e~nsra~e.~M.-
vwosc~TH~ ~~e.w:ue~s.~-~a~s- x.-as~esssk~~.-..er
a~v s ;o .-~o~t x s~,.ts.n~.~e
sr~rscnve ~c~e.~,,.,.,n~,-«am~L -rc:=.,e~a~t-9+~ - ~ - ' 'zn
~.~~
m
c~'~~..~-:a.+n~ ~.m s-~a~,~ ~~
:~-.-~e
~~
~~~
Ceerde05rc..3c.CUVaCi 6rvecwxr-l-e>'~-3CVC '
T
.
]-.e~-eNr~ t
??^I~..~/u
OC=a.~ c
e ~ o~~.,
nn~nan avwr srz=s ~
' .-~r,s
" 'r~ arw`.~~
PMKING L~ SGREFI.IING
RtOHTHESTREci_ ~~.tt-vrcrG4T:.p5Mra..v.n,~ nGB'w.~-'v.~rFw,esv]u~vioa4i,"-vn
.rai..a c,we:a~-..
~ey~.me w-~n
NNYn ~c_n ctivcr~ez~s.~ '0~3 .'~eeee:wck.TCEes.CSn.ac.+w+~
Varefc' ez'ad
'lfiqNG ~ SGREENING
FROMPDJACEt.IT
ror~ecYe I
PfEOPFR~IES
IMCRIORPPRKWGLOT
INJDSCAP°-0.VEn rerey'.reGicasvtlaiumac
I
rc*e -rvr.u-4'v~-,c~s~nTr:=mczz
IANDSCAPE SUMMARY CHART
1.0 ft
~~
~ - Sandstone Gcp
~i 5plii Face GMU 81ock -
Color and Detailiny to Match Bldg.
~'
Q ''
d: ~ ~ Vines Planted at Base of Wall on
. / East Side
~ 5~~ PARKWG LOT SCREEN WALL - SECTION
~ J SGALE 3~4'=1'-0"
Scnds~ane Gap
5plii Foce CMU 6fock -
Galar and DNailing to Match Bidg.
w
Q
d
~~ PARKIN6 L07 SCREEN WALL - ELEUATION
~\ i~ SCAfEI/2"=1-0'
~/
LANDSGAPE DETAILS AND SUMMARY GHART
` Develooer r , „ o , , ArchiteM:
Dean Callan & Company Culuer Court Van Meter Williams Po~lack.~~r
u~o ssrn ~ree= Site Review Subm ittal Q
Architecmre • Urtran ~esigrt
Bouldec CO 80303 1529 Market Street
Bouldef. Colorndo v e s~ s~ Semnd floor
~ Januory 6
2003 ~-° Denuen C080202
, ,„.,s..e. 303298.i4S0
~~ 1~ ~_ I-- ~~II-~